Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why was the civil war started
What causes the civil war essay amh 2010
Why was the civil war started
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why was the civil war started
The Civil War
The name Civil War is misleading because the war was not a class struggle, but a sectional combat, having its roots in political, economic, social, and psychological elements. It has been characterized, in the words of William H. Seward, as the “irrepressible conflict.” In another judgment the Civil War was viewed as criminally stupid, an unnecessary bloodletting brought on by arrogant extremists and blundering politicians. Both views accept the fact that in 1861 there existed a situation that, rightly or wrongly, had come to be regarded as insoluble by peaceful means.
In the days of the American Revolution and of the adoption of the Constitution, differences between North and South were dwarfed by their common interest in establishing a new nation. But sectionalism steadily grew stronger. During the 19th century the South remained almost completely agricultural, with an economy and a social order largely founded on slavery and the plantation system. These mutually dependent institutions produced the staples, especially cotton, from which the South derived its wealth. The North had its own great agricultural resources, was always more advanced commercially, and was also expanding industrially.
Hostility between the two sections grew perceptibly after 1820, the year of the Missouri Compromise, which was intended as a permanent solution to the issue in which that hostility was most clearly expressed—the question of the extension or prohibition of slavery in the federal territories of the West. Difficulties over the tariff (which led John C. Calhoun and South Carolina to nullification and to an extreme states' rights stand) and troubles over internal improvements were also involved,...
... middle of paper ...
...ed have been defeated and the Government itself has been destructive of them by the action of the nonslaveholding states,”- declared South Carolina, feeling discontent about the government “encouraging and assisting thousands of slaves to leave their homes.” (A Declaration of the Causes Which Induced the Secession of South Carolina, South Carolina, December 24, 1860) Lincoln responded to this action that no state has a right to leave the Union: “In doing this there needs to be bloodshed and violence; and there shall be none, unless it be forced upon the national authority.” (Abraham Lincoln, The US History, Chapter 17, p.338, 1977) But the southern answer was war!
Hence, although the Civil War was the result of extremism and failures of leadership on both sides, or, sometimes, as an irrepressible conflict, it was difficult to avoid it.
Tempers raged and arguments started because of the Missouri Compromise. The simple act caused many fatal events because of what was changed within the United States. It may not seem like a big thing now, but before slavery had been abolished, the topic of slavery was an idea that could set off fights. The Missouri Compromise all started in late in 1819 when the Missouri Territory applied to the Union to become a slave state. The problem Congress had with accepting Missouri as a slave state was the new uneven count of free states and slave states. With proslavery states and antislavery states already getting into arguments, having a dominant number of either slave or free states would just ignite the flame even more. Many representatives from the north, such as James Tallmadge of New York, had already tried to pass another amendment that would abolish slavery everywhere. Along with other tries to eliminate slavery, his effort was soon shot down. The fact that people couldn’t agree on whether or not slavery should be legalized made trying to compose and pass a law nearly impossible.
The American Civil War is one of the biggest turning points in American history. It marks a point of major separation in beliefs from the North and the South and yet somehow ends in a major unification that is now called the United States of America. It still to date remains the bloodiest war in American history. The book “This Republic of Suffering, Death and the American Civil War” by Drew Gilpin Faust better explains the change in thought from the American people that developed from the unexpected mass loss of soldiers that devastated the American people. Throughout this review, the reader will better understand the methods and theory of this book, the sources used, the main argument of the book, the major supporting arguments, and what the author did well and what the author didn’t do well.
According to article “Lincoln’s Journey to Emancipation” written by author Stephen B. Oates. “After Lincoln's victory and the secession of the seven states of the Deep South. Lincoln beseeched Southerners to understand the Republican position on slavery. In his Inaugural Address of 1861. he .15- sured them once again that the federal government would not tree the slaves in the South. that it had no legal right to do so. He even gave his blessings to the original Thirteenth Amendment. just passed by Congress. that would have guaranteed slavery in the Southern states for as long as whites there wanted it”. But the rebels out the south wanted to do things there way and continued to rebel against the United
Geographically, North and South were very different places. The pastures of New England were similar to those found in England, suitable for a variety of uses. Hot Southern prairie lands were perfect for cotton growing, a lucrative business at this time. Following the invention of Eli Whitney's Cotton Gin, the South became increasingly dependent on this crop, and an entire society grew out of it. The society was one of wealthy planters, who led a life similar to the landed gentry of England, controlling politics and society of the day. In the fields laboured Negro slaves, usually only a handful per plantation, though larger farms were occasionally seen. In addition, there lived poor whites, tenant farmers or smallholders, who eked out a living from the land. This contrasted sharply with Northern society, where industrialisation flourished, creating wealthy entrepreneurs and employing cheap immigrant labour. Given the localised nature of media, and difficulties of transport two cultures grew up in the same nation, remarkably different and often suspicious of one another.
As previously mentioned, slavery was at the root of most tensions that arose between the North and the South, and the annexation of new land created much conflict concerning the status of slavery. Missouri Compromise dictated that the lands of the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36¢ª30¡¯ parallel were to be free of slavery. Democratic senator Douglas, introduced a bill in early 1854 which proposed the division of the Nebraska Territory into two units, Kansas and Nebraska, and the application of his idea of ¡°popular sovereignty¡± which would allow the territorial vote to decide the area¡¯s status concerning slavery. This proposal would, in effect, repeal the Missouri Compromise, which greatly angered abolitionists and Northerners. Douglas and Southern supporters won a congressional debate and shortly after, the bill was signed. With the passage of this bill, many conflicts arose. Much personal turmoil erupted in the territories with almost immediate tragic results in ¡°Bleeding Kansas.¡± Also, the bill resulted in a complete realignment of the major political parties: The Democrats lost influence in the North and were to become the regional proslavery party of the South, the Whig Party, which had opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, died in the South and was weakened in the North, and a new Republican Party ...
...ld not protect the interest of the Southern states. Coupled with the hostilities, lack of votes for Lincoln from the South and disregard for the constitutional protection of slavery is a justifiable reason from the Southern leaders to secede from the Union.
The North and South were forming completely different economies, and therefore completely different geographies, from one another during the period of the Industrial Revolution and right before the Civil War. The North’s economy was based mainly upon industrialization from the formation of the American System, which was producing large quantities of goods in factories. The North was becoming much more urbanized due to factories being located in cities, near the major railroad systems for transportation of the goods, along with the movement of large groups of factory workers to the cities to be closer to their jobs. With the North’s increased rate of job opportunities, many different people of different ethnic groups and classes ended up working together. This ignited the demise of the North’s social order. The South was not as rapidly urbanizing as the North, and therefore social order was still in existence; the South’s economy was based upon the production of cotton after Eli Whitney’s invention of the cotton gin. Large cotton plantations’ production made up the bulk of America’s...
In the years of 1830 through 1860, a breach in the unity between the North and the South of the United States occurred. They faced an
The American Civil War was the bloodiest military conflict in American history leaving over 500 thousand dead and over 300 thousand wounded (Roark 543-543). One might ask, what caused such internal tension within the most powerful nation in the world? During the nineteenth century, America was an infant nation, but toppling the entire world with its social, political, and economic innovations. In addition, immigrants were migrating from their native land to live the American dream (Roark 405-407). Meanwhile, hundreds of thousand African slaves were being traded in the domestic slave trade throughout the American south. Separated from their family, living in inhumane conditions, and working countless hours for days straight, the issue of slavery was the core of the Civil War (Roark 493-494). The North’s growing dissent for slavery and the South’s dependence on slavery is the reason why the Civil War was an inevitable conflict. Throughout this essay we will discuss the issue of slavery, states’ rights, American expansion into western territories, economic differences and its effect on the inevitable Civil War.
Disagreements regarding slavery surrounded the primary reasons of succession and the Civil War. Citizens displayed views completely opposite of each other. On one end, many wanted slavery completely abolished while others wanted it to be limited to certain portions of the United States. In the Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and that Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in the territories. Along with those rulings, the Court also said that blacks could not sue at a federal level because they were not citizens of the United States. These decisions pulled on the already loose hold of the states’ unity. Northerners went ballistic over these rulings and passed laws to ensure slave...
When Abraham Lincoln spoke at his inauguration on March 1861, the nation’s mood was grim. It was a frigid day and the sky was grey. Even worse, nobody knew how the newly-elected President, a novice lawyer, would handle the nation’s biggest problem since its inception: Southern secession. The U.S., and its grandeur and resplendence were at stake and were now reduced to nothing more than the preposterous “Disunited States of America.” Americans were in a state of perplexity, and one question remained etched in the minds of Americans: “Did the South have a legal right to secede from the Union?” No, the South did not have a legal right to secede from the Union, due to the longevity of the Union, the solidarity between the states, and the menacing implications secession entails.
Believing that the Union was sovereign and perpetual, they viewed secession as an illegal and a revolutionary act. They feared that it would lead quickly to a fragmentation of the United States and put an end to America's mission of serving as a beacon of free government to the rest of the world. Still, no consensus existed on using force to get the seceded states back into the Union. In particular, Democrats were against it and favored negotiations to heal the sectional rift, even with the continuation of slavery. At the same time, the Unionists in the Upper South who had turned back secession in their slave states proclaiming that they would resist any Republican use of military force against a seceded
In the beginning of the 1800s, economic diversities between the two different regions had also grown. By the year 1860, cotton was the chief crop for the South; it also represented fifty-seven percent of all American exports. The prosperity of cotton fulfilled the South's reliance on the plantation system and its crucial elementslavery.
After thoroughly assessing past readings and additional research on the Civil War between the North and South, it was quite apparent that the war was inevitable. Opposed views on this would have probably argued that slavery was the only reason for the Civil War. Therefore suggesting it could have been avoided if a resolution was reached on the issue of slavery. Although there is accuracy in stating slavery led to the war, it wasn’t the only factor. Along with slavery, political issues with territorial expansion, there were also economic and social differences between North and South. These differences, being more than just one or two, gradually led to a war that was bound to happened one way or another.
The causes and result of the Civil War have scholarly been perceived diverse. This paper will give a detailed analysis the observations providing clear and concrete support.